Tax

A. Ten Eyck BROWN, Petitioner, v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent

55 F.2d 1076·United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit·1932

Brief incoming

Hand-reviewed Bluebook brief (procedural posture, facts, issue, holding, reasoning, dissent) ships once the AI generation pipeline runs through this case. Join the waitlist to get notified when 1L briefs go live.

Opinion

A. Ten Eyck BROWN, Petitioner, v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent. No. 6187. Circuit Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit. Feb. 22, 1932. J. C. Murphy, of Atlanta, Ga., for petitioner. G. A. Youngquist, Asst. Atty. Gen., Se-wall Key and Wm. Cutler Thompson, Sp. Assts. to Atty. Gen., and C. M. Charest, Gen. Counsel, Bureau of Internal Revenue, and Allin H. Pierce, Sp. Atty. Bureau of Internal Revenue, both of Washington, D. C., for respondent. Before BRYAN, POSTER, and WALKER, Circuit Judges. [MAJORITY — PER CURIAM.] PER CURIAM. The Board of Tax Appeals held the petitioner liable' for an income tax upon the amounts of compensation he received from the city of Atlanta as supervising architect for a number of public school buildings. The facts are fully stated in the opinion of the Board, reported in 19 B. T. A. 568, and need not be repeated here. We think the case is controlled by the decision of the Supreme Court in Metcalf & Eddy v. Mitchell, 269 U. S. 514, 46 S. Ct. 172, 70 L. Ed. 384. The petition for review is denied.